Which is exactly the argument FOR letting kids choose their own path.

There are a few subjects which kids have 'forced' on them which they end up 'never using', and certain others which they do end up needing later but are introduced to in a different way or context which makes it actually interesting.

It's not a bad idea to let them start with the subjects they like, give them the assurance and security of knowing that a stable life exists for them having that basis, then encourage them to pursue other subjects at their leisure if and when those things become relevant.

Perhaps this is related to the more theoretical nature of math and physics? With computer programming especially, you can immediately apply the concepts you learn and get instant feedback and satisfaction from seeing simple programs actually achieve things.

With math and physics, I've found that I am far motivated to learn concepts when having an immediate practical application for them, say in the context of computer graphics. Being able to apply what you're learning to create things is tremendously motivating, while if you remain in the pure theoretical domain, it can seem abstract and aimless without an external structure to direct you.